Capitalists love poverty

[Toppler]

Does anybody notice that capitalist "democide" and "death counts" from semi-human slime like R. J. Rummel use the technique of extrapolating the "non-democidal" population count if the growth rate stayed the same, as for example in Tsarist Russia for the USSR and then claiming the difference was EVIL COMMUNIST DEMOCIDAL MURDER?

You know what it means instead? That the USSR reduced poverty so of course, birth rates have gone down. By capitalist logic, poverty reduction and literacy campaign are murder. They love poverty. That is why they babble their meaningless bullshit about "exporting democratic freedom" and disregard the fact that their beloved system kills more than the Holocaust in 1 year from malnutrition and disease alone.

I'd be quite happy to "democide" Rummel through. If Julius Streicher was executed for spreading virulent Nazi propaganda in Der Sturmer, then he can be executed for spreading capitalist propaganda that is helping a system that kills more than Nazis (and I mean the Holocaust + entire WW2, as they are responsible for it, hey, it is still more honest death counting than his methods that considers not living in shit and having 8 children as "democide", because preventing 60 million illiterate, malnourished children from being born = murdering 60 million people) ever did in every 10 years just through poverty. He is a pig who advocates for American wars as "saving teh millions of opresed pppls".

[Tommy4ever]

Capitalists don't love poverty. They just don't give a shit.

* Big difference.

[Blake's Baby]

Of course they give a shit. If there was no poverty there would be no capitalism. Poverty is necessary for capitalism to function. The rich cannot be rich without the corresponding poverty of everyone else. 'It is the few rich that are the cause of the many poor' as someone said in the 4th century AD, and it's still true.

To the OP, don't worry about it, the Soviet Union was capitalist, as was Nazi Germany and thus the Holocaust, so they're all capitalist murderers anyway.

[Toppler]

The Soviet Union was not capitalist. And I do not need to convince myself of its horribleness/non-horribleness as my mother is from the Ukrainian SSR so I am aware it was not a horror land, not after Stalin.

[Blake's Baby]

You say tomato.

'Socialism in one country' = state capitalism. Are you a Marxist? If you are, please explain whether the Soviet Union was a) capitalist, or b) socialist.

Bear in mind that socialism is a worldwide classless communal society; hint, that's not what the Soviet Union was.

Or, was Marx wrong? (IE, you're not a Marxist). Just so as I know what I'm arguing with.

[Tommy4ever]

Of course they give a shit. If there was no poverty there would be no capitalism. Poverty is necessary for capitalism to function. The rich cannot be rich without the corresponding poverty of everyone else. 'It is the few rich that are the cause of the many poor' as someone said in the 4th century AD, and it's still true.

To the OP, don't worry about it, the Soviet Union was capitalist, as was Nazi Germany and thus the Holocaust, so they're all capitalist murderers anyway.

Not really. People don't have to live in poverty, they just have to be poor.

Generally, its slightly better for the capitalists if there is less poverty as there is less social strain (and this class struggle) and there are larger markets for their products.

Also, and you're not going to believe this one, capitalists actually have morals! :ohmy:. Now calm down a little here - these people might actually have a moral quibble with people living in poverty and want to help out a little - thats my alturism exists.

Basically, capitalists don't like poverty - however if it takes reducing profits in order to combat it they are probably not going to bother. Profits before moral agendas. Always.

[Toppler]

Bear in mind that socialism is a worldwide classless communal society; hint, that's not what the Soviet Union was.

That is communism. Socialism is the transitional stage.

[Toppler]

Also, I'd like if you didn't refer to Nazi Germany in the same sentence as the Soviet Union. Thank you.

[Blake's Baby]

Only if you're a Leninist. If you're a Marxist then what you might be talking about as the transitional stage is 'the lower phase of communism'. Or it might be 'the dictatorship of the proletariat'. Lenin was a bit unclear what he meant when he talked about 'socialism'. Either way, it's not socialism/communism, which were the same thing for Marx.

[Omsk]

To hell with you people and your annoying: "It was not real socialism harhnngng"
The SU was what communist and socialists,workers had,what they fought for and what they achieved,it was a socialist country,but it had its problems.
If you continue with the silly impossible standards of declaring a country socialist,than you should keep on dreaming,something like that (completely idealistic and perfect) wont exist in the near future nor could it.

Bear in mind that socialism is a worldwide classless communal society
With this line you just proved that you don't really know what you are writing about.
Except the usual "Throw junk on the SU,be popular in liberal circles."


Soviet Union was capitalist, as was Nazi Germany and thus the Holocaust, so they're all capitalist murderers anyway.

And stop putting bloody Nazi Germany in the same basket with the SU,they were not and will never be the same,or similar no matter how hard you revisionists try to link them up!

[Red Future]

If someone is equating Nazi Germany on the same level of repression as the Soviet Union despite the fact that one was ,anti-worker Racist and Militaristic and the other the complete opposite of this ...I usually think of a Conservative

[Red Future]

To hell with you people and your annoying: "It was not real socialism harhnngng"
The SU was what communist and socialists,workers had,what they fought for and what they achieved,it was a socialist country,but it had its problems.
If you continue with the silly impossible standards of declaring a country socialist,than you should keep on dreaming,something like that (completely idealistic and perfect) wont exist in the near future nor could it.

With this line you just proved that you don't really know what you are writing about.
Except the usual "Throw junk on the SU,be popular in liberal circles."



And stop putting bloody Nazi Germany in the same basket with the SU,they were not and will never be the same,or similar no matter how hard you revisionists try to link them up!

What ?????? Some people amaze me.Dumbest psuedo comparison I have seen In Years.

[Revolutionair]

If someone is equating Nazi Germany on the same level of repression as the Soviet Union despite the fact that one was ,anti-worker Racist and Militaristic and the other the complete opposite of this ...I usually think of a Conservative

Yeah or a Marxist who uses the mode of production to analyze societies...

[Red Future]

Yeah or a Marxist who uses the mode of production to analyze societies...

A Command economy and fascist Corporatism are alike???:confused:

[Revolutionair]

That's the superstructure.
The mode of production was in both cases capitalist.

[Blake's Baby]

... no matter how hard you revisionists try to link them up!

Oh please. Beef up on you tendency wars, Comrade Honecker; you'll get into trouble if you don't refer to my by my proper title. What I think you meant was "... no matter how hard you sectarian ultra-left deviationists try to link them..."

[B0LSHEVIK]

Capitalism systematically creates poverty. So, like a good parent it must love its child.;)

[LewisQ]

I keep reading this thread title as "Capitalists love poetry."

Goddamn poetry-loving capitalist bastards.